Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of linux-kernel-owner@vger.kernel.org designates 2620:137:e000::1:20 as permitted sender) client-ip=2620:137:e000::1:20;
Date:   Tue, 1 Nov 2022 14:37:17 -0700
From:   Kees Cook <keescook@chromium.org>
To:     "Ruhl, Michael J" <michael.j.ruhl@intel.com>
Cc:     "Brandeburg, Jesse" <jesse.brandeburg@intel.com>,
        "Nguyen, Anthony L" <anthony.l.nguyen@intel.com>,
        "David S. Miller" <davem@davemloft.net>,
        Eric Dumazet <edumazet@google.com>,
        Jakub Kicinski <kuba@kernel.org>,
        Paolo Abeni <pabeni@redhat.com>,
        "intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org" <intel-wired-lan@lists.osuosl.org>,
        "netdev@vger.kernel.org" <netdev@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org" <linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org>,
        "linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org" <linux-hardening@vger.kernel.org>
Subject: Re: [PATCH v3 2/2] igb: Proactively round up to kmalloc bucket size
Message-ID: <202211011433.A64BF17F46@keescook>
References: <20221018092340.never.556-kees@kernel.org>
 <20221018092526.4035344-2-keescook@chromium.org>
 <202210282013.82F28AE92@keescook>
 <DM5PR11MB1324802F3F2098CB3239CF36C1379@DM5PR11MB1324.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <DM5PR11MB1324802F3F2098CB3239CF36C1379@DM5PR11MB1324.namprd11.prod.outlook.com>
Precedence: bulk

On Mon, Oct 31, 2022 at 08:42:36PM +0000, Ruhl, Michael J wrote:
> Looking at the size usage (from elixir), I see:
> 
> --
> 	if (!q_vector) {
> 		q_vector = kzalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
> 	} else if (size > ksize(q_vector)) {
> 		kfree_rcu(q_vector, rcu);
> 		q_vector = kzalloc(size, GFP_KERNEL);
> 	} else {
> 		memset(q_vector, 0, size);
> 	}
> --
> 
> If the size is rounded up, will the (size > ksize()) check ever be true?
> 
> I.e. have you eliminated this check (and maybe getting rid of the need for first patch?)?

Hi!

It looked like igb_alloc_q_vector() was designed to be called multiple
times on the same q_vector (i.e. to grow its allocation size over time).
So for that case, yes, the "size > ksize(q_vector)" check is needed. If
it's only ever called once (which is hard for me to tell), then no. (And
if "no", why was the alloc/free case even there in the first place?)

-Kees

-- 
Kees Cook